|Page tools: Print Page Print All|
NEW PUBLICATION DESIGN - AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL ACCOUNTS : State Accounts Australia, (cat. no. 5220.0)
Over this period, growth in GSP chain volume measures varied considerably between the states, with growth being strongest in Queensland and Victoria and weakest in Tasmania and South Australia. The dispersion of growth rates was less, but still significant, in terms of GSP chain volume measures per head of mean population.
GSP PER HEAD OF MEAN POPULATION (RATIO TO AUSTRALIA)
The graphs below show an index of GSP, in current prices, per head of mean population for each state and territory divided by the Australian estimate for total gross domestic product (GDP) per head of mean population, for the period 1990-91 to 2001-02. It should be noted that GSP per head of mean population cannot be equated with the income of households in a particular state-see comments on gross household disposable income below.
GSP per head of mean population in 2001-02 was above the national average in New South Wales, Victoria, Western Australia, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory. The Australian Capital Territory had the highest level in each of the years from 1991-92 to 1999-2000, while the Northern Territory had the highest level in 1989-90, 1990-91 and in the latest two years. GSP per head of mean population in Queensland, South Australia and Tasmania has not exceeded the national average during this period. All states except New South Wales, Western Australia and the Northern Territory experienced an increase in this ratio in 2001-02.
REAL GROSS STATE DOMESTIC INCOME
The chain volume estimates of GSP measure the volume of goods and services produced in each state. If the terms of trade for a state change significantly (i.e. the prices for a state's exports and imports change at different rates) then chain volume GSP will not accurately reflect the change in real purchasing power of the income generated within a state. For this reason a new measure, real gross state domestic income (RGSDI), has been developed which measures chain volume GSP adjusted for changes in the terms of trade. This new measure was introduced in a feature article published in the March quarter 2002 issue of Australian National Accounts: National Income, Expenditure and Product (cat. no. 5206.0). (For details on the calculation method see the Explanatory Notes, paragraphs 35 to 37).
The following graphs show percentage changes in RGSDI per head of mean population over the period 1992-93 to 2001-02. Generally the pattern of growth for each state and territory reflects the pattern of growth in GSP. However, there are some notable differences in some years for some states, particularly for Western Australia and the Northern Territory.
INDUSTRY COMPOSITION OF TOTAL FACTOR INCOME
Individual industry contributions to total factor income for 2001-02 are shown below. In line with long term trends, there has been a shift from goods producing industries to service providing industries over the period 1989-90 to 2001-02.
The main industries contributing to the relative decline in goods producing industries have been: agriculture, forestry and fishing; manufacturing; and electricity, gas and water supply. Service industries, except for wholesale and retail trade, have increased in relative importance in most States. One significant exception to this trend in recent years has been the increased importance of mining in the Northern Territory such that it now represents 24% of total factor income compared to 13% in 1998-99.
(a) Industries may not add to total due to rounding differences.
(b) State details for general government gross operating surplus by industry are not available.
GROSS HOUSEHOLD DISPOSABLE INCOME
The analysis of GSP per head of mean population above concentrates on the level of economic production (GSP) and its growth in current price terms. It does not provide a measure of incomes received by residents of a particular state, because a proportion of income generated in the production process may be transferred to other states or overseas (and conversely income may be received from other states or overseas). Gross household disposable income per head of mean population in 2001-02 is shown below.
Gross household disposable income per head of mean population was highest in the Australian Capital Territory and lowest in Tasmania. Differences between the states reflect differences, from state to state, in the impact of a range of factors including the average level of compensation of employees received per employee, the proportion of the population in employment, the age distribution of the population, and differences in the level of dwelling rent (including that imputed to owner occupiers). For example, a significant reason for the high level of gross household disposable income per head of mean population in the Australian Capital Territory compared with other states is that the labour force participation rate is much higher there than in the rest of Australia.
These documents will be presented in a new window.